The Supreme Court has denied recognizing the great disability an employee, seller of coupons of the eleven that he had already requested to be declared in a situation of permanent disability, but the National Social Security Institute had denied it. Despite suffering blindness and severe visual limitationsthe high court considers that the worker does not need the continuous assistance of a third person for the essential activities of daily life, since he has been able to perform his usual work activity for several years without impediments.
Apparently and according to the sentence, everything begins in 2020, when this seller of coupons of the eleven, affected by advanced blindness and severe visual limitations, requests the Social Security that is recognized, the permanent disability, being denied is denied. The INSS argued that, despite suffering blindness, the worker had played his activity for years, not complying with the necessary requirements to grant him the degree of great disability (the highest that can be granted social security).
The great disability is granted when in addition to this Incapacitated for any work activity, it is necessary for a third person for the most basic acts of life How to eat or dress. In this sense, the disabilities assessment team (EVI), in its evaluation, considers that the plaintiff did not present a situation that justified the need for that continuous assistance. In his medical reports, it was indicated that the worker had already suffered blindness for years, but that this condition had not prevented him from doing his usual work as a seller of coupons autonomously. It was even pointed out that, although there were severe visual limitations, they had not evolved significantly over time.
The worker, after being rejects his request, submit a demand before the Social Court No. 3 of Albacete, which was admitted and being recognized the degree of great disability. Even so, Social Security decided to present a resource of supplication before the Social Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Castilla-La Manchawhich revoked the initial sentencearguing that the worker had carried out his work activity as a coupon seller for years, even with his advanced visual situation, and it was not proven that he need constant help from third parties to perform essential acts of daily life. This setback caused the worker to have that in a last instance he went to the Supreme Court in order to give him the reason.
Do not meet the requirements for permanent disability due to great disability
The Supreme Court, after reviewing the case, referred to Article 194.1.d) of the General Social Security Law (LGSS). This says and as we have commented before, that the great disability is applicable only when the worker, in addition to not being able to do any work due to an absolute permanent disability, requires the continuous assistance of a third person to carry out the essential acts of the Daily life, such as dressing, prowling or feeding. This was key to the Supreme Court, which determined that the worker’s visual limitations did not justify this constant need for assistance.
The Court also took into account the new doctrine established in March 2023 by the Plenary of the Social Chamber of the Supreme Court itself (R. 1766/2020 and R. 3980/2019, among others), which applies a subjective approach to Assess the cases of disability. According to this doctrine, a same pathology can have different effects according to the personal circumstances of each individualso the recognition of the great disability must be evaluated individually. That is, in this case, for example, blindness does not affect different people, as well as the way of making daily life.
In this case, the High Court determined that, although the worker suffered advanced blindnesshe had played his usual work activity for years autonomously and it was not shown to depend on third parties to perform the essential acts of his daily life. In addition, the high court referred to jurisprudential precedents in which they indicate that the need for that third people must be constant or not sporadically.
For all the above, the Supreme Court decided to reject the appeal and Deny the right to permanent disability to its degree of great disability. This degree is a life pension whose amount is 100% of the regulatory base and also 45% of the minimum contribution base in force at the time of the recognition of the disability, and 30% of the last contribution base of the worker.